Great video for resonating with many mature Evangelical Christians in the context of Evangelicalism.

Can I suggest, that the method of delivery be considered in order to be effectual to a wider audience?

It seems, does it not, mention the words “religion” (especially in Glasgow) “Christian”, “Evangelical” and “apologetics” together and a wall goes up with the man on the street, if not that, that he regard such often as a negative and something to oppose with cultural influences as they stand.

Also, we are in changed times from a few decades ago where there was high nominalism and in a culture where there is less known about the bible, “bible talk” can come across as a foreign tongue, alienating even.

What did Jesus do – he spoke in parables, so that people could hear the word. When the so called righteous looked down on othesr as “sinners”, he said a doctor isn’t needed for the healthy but for the sick, he cam not for the righteous but for sinners.

And, don’t we know that when God “created humanity, he saw it was good.” So, humanity in its’ truest sense is good, that has been spoiled by departure from God, and because everyone is created in the image of God it is right that it be held to that all are born equal and with dignity and should be related to in “a spirit of brotherhood?” The UDHR can say what belief is held to on that and what should happen, but pointing to the bible can show why it should happen.

Finally, totally agree that if one is secure in Christ there is no need to be defensive about Dawkins. There is humour and irony in that Dawkins in encouraging people to read the bible in order to deconstruct it, the opposite effect has happened and for them, societal influences have been deconstructed.

One might even say he has done more for evangelicalism than some evangelists. One might even suggest without invalidity that he could be (as the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar was described in taking an apostate Israel into exile) a “servant of the Lord” without knowing it.